





i é >i 
r ulate 
) ¥ eee aay 
: oN 7 . xy” a 
3 = “ 
¢ 
: 
) 
i ‘ 
. 


























CHARLES FRASER 


By 
Atice R. Hucer SmitTH 
AND 


D. E. Hucer SmiTruH 





New Yor«k 


FREDERIC FAIRCHILD SHERMAN 
MCMXXIV 





‘Copyright, 1924, by 
Freperic Faircuitp SHERMAN 
All rights reserved 








ia 


PREFACE 


To a Carolinian there comes an especial pleasure in writing of 
Charles Fraser, and it is hoped that this pleasure will be under- 
stood when the reader will have followed the events of his life. 
For he was a man of his day in type and character. Well-born, 
well-bred, and well-educated he was but one of a large group of 
men, who were fortunate enough to live at a period when the 
country was attaining its growth, and to live in touch with those 
elements which in their very conflicts were giving it a character 
of its own. 


Relieved by fortune from the paralysis of either extreme want 
_ or excessive wealth, he could not only see, but could also follow 
the better aims of life, and the continued esteem shown to him in 
his latter years by his neighbors attests his success in the pursuit 
of those aims. 


As an artist his works must speak for themselves; but as an 
artist among artists one has only to look through the pages in 
which Dunlap gives F'raser’s recollections of contemporary paint- 
ers to appreciate that kindliness, which was one of his marked 
qualities. 


The writer feels that the generous way in which the owners of 
so very many valuable miniatures have entrusted them to her, is 
a good evidence of their feeling towards the memory of the artist, 
and of their wish to help this record of his work and life. 


Their number is so great that it is impossible to thank them 
herein by name, and it is hoped that they will accept this compre- 
hensive manner of showing her gratitude to them and to others 
who have given their help. 


lil 





- 






MS tel ns 
+ 


er miniat 
e writer t 






e ae | ost ap 
=O rae 2 ; ‘ 
i = ate ee is : | 
ee 8 3 ge 
x<B) a ; 
Bat Tela 
Sas 2a 
8 8 bet 
oOo a | 
= §%3 ee 
fe Oe ae | . 
ean te na 
oa a ee 
2 8 is 2 te 
Sos BE 
A Bo — < 
wy An c ; 
ie a3 
fects Be oer ) 
é ; i! f f 






ae 








JES FRAser’s PLACE INTHE COMMUNITY .. . . 


es es ° e 
e e e 
e e e e e 
wy 
° e e e e e e 
7 
se e e e e e e © 


wor eee Work 1n Miniature PaintiInc . 


AME? TS oN MIniaTuREs REPRODUCED sae ee Mrales & 


12 


28 


oe 








LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


Cares Fraser. By Himself. Painted 1823. Frontispiece 


JANE WintTHROP. Painted 1802. (Ia) 
FREDERICK FRAsER. Painted 1810. (Ib) 
Tuomas Wricut Bacot. Painted 1818. (II a) 
Epwarp CoTEswortH RutTLepce. Painted 1818. (IIb) 
Joun RuTiepce. Painted 1818. (III a) 

CHaARLES CoTESWORTH PINCKNEY. Painted 1823. (III b) 


Mrs. SAMUEL PRIoLEAU. (CATHERINE CorpEs). Painted 


1818 and 1823. (IVa) (IVb) 
James Retp Princte. Painted 1820. (Va) 


Ropert JAMEs TURNBULL. Painted between 1830 and 


1833. (Vb) ibe 
Cor. WituiAM Atston. Painted 1839. (VI a) 


Mrs. Wituiam Auston. (Mary Brewton Motte). 


Painted 1839. (VIb) 


Mrs. Wituiam Buamyer. (Frances Pocson). Painted 
feos ( Vila} 


Master O’Brien SmitrH McPuerson. Painted 1823. 


(VII b) 
Geni. Marquis bE Larayette. Painted 1825. (VIII a) 
Francis Kintocu Hucer. Painted 1825. (VIII b) 


Vil 


Facing Page 


te pa LPN. St 


10 


12 


Mrs. JosepH SANFORD BARKER. (HENRIETTA CATHERINE 
GaILLARD). Painted 1826. (IX a) 


JosepH SANForD Barker. Painted 1826. (IX b) 
THEODORE GouRDIN. Painted 1826. (Xa) 


Mrs. THEoporRE GourDIN. (ELIzABETH GAILLARD). Painted 
1826. (Xb) 


Mrs. Mircueiyi Kinc. (HENRIETTA CAMPBELL). Painted 


1826. (XI a) 
Dr. Epwarp Wasuincton Nortu. Painted about 1820- 
25 UXT be A a 
Cuarues Winturop. Painted 1827. (XII) 
Henry Deas. Painted about 1828-35. (XIII a) 
NatrHAniEL Heywarp. Painted 1829. (XIIIb) 


Miss Harriett Lownpes. (Later wife of Gov.Wn. AIKEN). 


Painted 1831. (XIV a) 


Mrs. Harris Simons. (Mary I’on Wrace). Painted 
1830. (XIVb) 


Duncan Natuaniet Incranam. (Later Captain U. S. 
Navy and Commodore C. S. Navy). Painted 1830. 


Mrs. SAMUEL GAILLARD Barker. (ELLEN MILLIKEN). 
Painted about 1831. (XVI a) 


Mrs. Wituiam ELNaTHAN Hasketi. (SUSANNAH SPLATT 


Batu). Painted about 1831. (XVIb) 
Henry Workman Conner. Painted 1832. (XVII) 
Joun McPuerson Princie. Painted 1830. (XVIII a) . 


James Heywarp Trapier. (Later Brigadier Gen. C. S. 
Army). Painted 1833. (XVIII b) 


Vill 


14 
14 
14 


14 


18 


18 
20 
22 
22 


26 


26 


28 
30 


30 


34 
36 


36 





Ropert BaRNWELL. Painted about 1833. (XIX) 
BenjJAMIN Faneuin Dunkin. Painted 1835. (XX a) 


Mrs. Benjamin Faneutt Dunkin. (WASHINGTON SALA 


PRENTIss). Painted 1835. (XX b) 
James Louis Peticru. Painted 1834. (XXI a) 
GENERAL JAMES HamituTon, Jr. Painted 1835. (XXIb) 
Miss Rosamonp Mites Princue. Painted 1839. (XXII b) 


Mrs. Henry Lesesne. (Harriette Pericru). Painted 
about 1834. (XXIIa). 


Rosert McKewn Auuan. Painted 1835. (XXIII a) 
Joun Juxius Princie. Painted about 1840. (XXIII b) 


Mrs. Witi1aAm Ropertson. (SUSANNAH Boone FREER). 


Painted about 1840. (XXIV a) 


Mrs. BENJAMIN ALLSTON. (CHARLOTTE ANN ALLSTON). 


Painted before 1824. (XXIV b) 


Mrs. Wituiam Mayrant. (Ann Ricuarpson). Painted 
about 1840. (XXV a) 


Mrs. Henry Gray. (Yancy CupwortH). Painted 1842. 


(XXV b) Papeete er ow ae. 
Wituiam Cattery Bee. Painted probably about 1845. 

(XXVI a) eee aD a cme fe gen na ae 
GeorceE SmiTH Bryan. Painted 1845. (XXVIb) . 


ELIZABETH SARAH Faper. (Mrs. BERKLEY GRIMBALL WIL- 


KINS). Painted 1846. (XXVII) 


FREDERICK GRIMKE Fraser. Painted about 1852. 


(XXVIII a) 


Master JAMEs BuTLER CamMpBELL. Painted 1845. 


(XXVIII b) 


1X 





CHARLES FRASER 
HIS ORIGIN AND EDUCATION 


Charles Fraser was of the third generation of his family in 
America. 

His grandfather, John Fraser, was born at Wigton, County 
Galloway, Scotland, and came to Carolina about the year 1700. 

Where he first settled does not appear, but in 1715 he was liv- 
ing in the country of the Yamassee Indians, south of the Com- 
bahee River, among whom he had settled as an Indian trader, 
and with whom his relations were most friendly. 

Sanute, a chieftain of this tribe, on his return from a visit to 
St. Augustine, came to Frraser’s house, and urged that he and his 
family should fly to Charles Town* and thus escape the mas- 
sacre planned by the Spaniards and confederated Indian na- 
tions. Fraser’s neighbors and himself doubted this informa- 
tion, but Mrs. Fraser’s fears induced the flight, and they thus 

escaped the massacre, which commenced on 15th April, 1715. 
_ This was the beginning of the great Yamassee war, during 
which the Indians from the Southward destroyed the settle- 
ments and massacred the inhabitants as far as the Stono River 
within ten to twenty miles of Charles Town, while the tribes 
from the Northward were not checked until they had approached 
Goose Creek, about the same distance in the other direction. 
This has been told at length in histories by Rivers, McCrady, 
and others. | 

_ The only son of John Fraser was Alexander, who by his sec- 
ond wife, Mary Grimke, was the father of fourteen children. Of 

*Note. During the Colonial period the chief city of South Carolina was called Charles 
Town. It was in 1783 that the name was changed to Charleston by the Act of Incorpora- 
tion. The right name of each period has been here followed. 

I 





them the youngest, Charles Fraser, was born 20th August, 1782, 
only a few days before Marion fought with the British Cavalry 
leader, Major Fraser, at Wadboo his last fight of the war, and 
before Col. John Laurens was killed on the bank of the Com- 
bahee. | 

Born at the end of the Revolutionary War, Fraser died on 5th 
October, 1860, and thus his life covered the years from the Rev- 
ofution to the Confederate War; and it will be interesting to 
note that his personality made a part of all the movement and 
development of that period. 

Fraser’s father died in 1791, and his mother on 3rd January, 
1807. 

At a very early age he showed an artistic aptitude, and the au- 
thor owns a sketch-book of his, beginning with a little water- 
color drawing dated 2 May, 1796, when he was not yet fourteen, 
and containing numerous carefully drawn presentments of the 
houses of his friends both in the town and the country, all done 
between that date and 1806. But antedating even the earliest 
of these, there was exhibited in “The Fraser Gallery” as No. 3 
his “first portrait, sketched at the age of ten years, 1792,” of his 
first cousin, Master States Rutledge. It was about this period 
that the boyish intimacy between Sully and Fraser began, and 
their mutual encouragement of each other’s artistic taste is 
pleasantly told by Dunlap in his sketch of Sully. 

They were both pupils at the classical school of the Revd. 
Robert Smith, Master of Arts and sometime Fellow of Gonville 
and Caius College of the University of Cambridge. At the out- 
break of the Revolution he was Rector of St. Philip’s Parish in 
Charles Town, and, upon the capture of that place by Sir Henry 
Clinton in 1780, he had been exiled and his entire property se- 
questrated by the British authorities. On his return to his par- 
ish in 1783 he had found it necessary to supplement his broken 
fortunes by tuition. His Academy in 1790 was given up to the 


2 




































Jane WINTHROP. 1792-1862 
Niece of the artist 


Painted 1802 


(I a) 








FREDERICK FRASER. 1762-1816 
Brother of the artist 


Painted 1810 
(I b) 





Pe 














Tuomas Wricut Bacor. 1765-1834 Epwarp Coreswortu RuTLEDGE. 1798-1860 
Painted 1818 Painted 1818 


(II a) (II b) 








newly incorporated College of Charleston, of which he became 
and remained the Principal until 1798, three years after his con- 
secration as the first Bishop of South Carolina. 

Fraser in his Reminiscences gives several anecdotes of the Col- 
lege at this period, telling of the playground or Campus which 
lay not far south of the revolutionary ramparts, out of which the 
students would dig bullets, lodged there during the Siege. From 
the declivity of the rampart, Dr.Smith delivered an address when 
the corner stone of the Orphan House was laid in 1792, on which 
occasion the College boys took part in the procession. 

In 1817 we find Mr. Fraser’s name among the Trustees of this 
College, and we are told that for nearly forty years he was a Trus- 
tee and Treasurer of the Board — “a man of exquisite taste and 
refinement, artist, scholar, and poet.” (See Year Book of City of 
Charleston, 1882, p. 283). 

It is not surprising that he should have been selected in 1828 
to deliver the address at the laying of the foundation-stone of the 
new edifice of this college, from which we quote somewhat freely, 
nor that he should dwell felicitously upon the advantages of Eidu- 
cation, which alone could determine the end to which could be 
directed the tendencies springing from the freedom of inquiry 
and of opinion, resulting from our popular institutions. For un- 
less Society fills up with care and diligence the outlines so strong- 
ly marked, they may as readily become the agents of national de- 
pravity and degradation, as of national dignity and virtue. Such 
varied energies will not remain inactive — they are calculated for 
action and must be exercised. 

But the orator was not content to enlarge only on the advan- 
tage of education in general. He brought forcibly forward the 
importance of higher education at home; for the State had an 
interest in the matter; she had a right to the sentiments and 
opinions of her citizens, and a claim even upon their prejudices 
and attachments! 


But perhaps enough has been said to indicate the line of 
thought followed in this address. 

In these days of futile discussion as to the advantages of the 
study at school of Greek and Latin, it may be well to state shortly 
his view of these: “But when the higher studies of the college ex- 
“pand his (the student’s) mind, that which he was acquainted 
“with before, only in the corporeal form, strikes him with all the 
“beauty and grandeur of intellect. The spirit of ancient genius 
“breathes upon him in every line, ‘presentia numina sentit’; he 
“is enamoured of the very languages in which it is embodied, 
“and learns to venerate them as its only suitable shrine.” 














Joun RutLepcE. 1739-1800 CHARLES CoTeswortH PincKNEY. 1746-1825 


After Trumbull 


Painted 1823 
Painted 1818 (III b) 
(III a) 


th 


Pit, 'y 





>) ™ 


i) 











CHARLES FRASER’S PLACE 
IN THE COMMUNITY 


Fraser was fortunate in the social surroundings of his child- 
hood and youth, for his family relations placed him at once in the 
circle of people of good breeding, education, and good taste. Mr. 
William Williamson, member of the Council of Safety in 1775, 
was a half-brother of his mother. He was a man of taste, whose 
beautiful garden on the bank of Wallace’s Creek is extolled in 
Ramsay’s History of South Carolina. 

Fraser’s aunt, Eliza Grimke, had married Chief Justice John 
Rutledge, sometimes styled “Dictator Rutledge,” because in 
1780 the Legislature had delegated “till ten days after their next 
session to the Governor, John Rutledge, Esquire, and such of the 
Council as he could conveniently consult, a power to do every- 
thing necessary for the public good except the taking away the 
life of a citizen without a legal trial.” Under this delegation “for 
two years John Rutledge was enabled to keep up an organiza- 
tion of the government, and almost alone to carry on the war.” 
A paternal aunt of Charles Fraser had married (1st) William 

Cattell, by whom she had two sons, Lt. Col. William Cattell and 
Capt. Benjamin Cattell, both of the South Carolina Continen- 
tal Line, and (2nd) Col. Owen Roberts of the 4th So. Ca. Conti- 
nentals, who was killed at the Battle of Stono in 1779. 

Of Charles Fraser’s brothers and sisters, William married 
Miss Sophia Miles ; Frederick married Mary DeSaussure; Mary 
married in 1788 Joseph Winthrop, born in New London, Con- 
necticut, in 1757, a sonof John Still Winthrop ; and Ann married 


Jacob Guerard. 


Fraser’s own place in the community cannot be better de- 
scribed than by quoting the words of his friend and much young- 
er contemporary, Hon. George S. Bryan: 

“In him the man has not been merged in the painter, nor 
“dwarfed and emptied of its proper dignity, that the genius might 
“flourish. We find therefore that society, country, the author of 
“nature and all glory and beauty, as well as nature itself, have 
“claimed the homage of his mind and heart, and are traceable in 
“living characters alike in his writings, his life, and the living col- 
“ors of his pencil. ‘The community, in which he has so long 
“lived, with one mind regard him as a faithful citizen, a pillar 
“and anornament. And although he has never been in our pub- 
“lic councils, yet has he ever been esteemed a wise counsellor; 
“and more active spirits, who have mingled in affairs and osten- 
“sibly given direction to our public affairs and shape to our meas- 
“ures, have been glad to avail themselves of the stores of his 
“knowledge, and felt safer when their conduct has received the 
“approval of his wisdom ..... and as there is a time for all 
“things, and life does not alone consist in action, but seasons 
“come when man rises to his highest life, and pauses in his hur- 
“ried career to think and feel and keep holy days of his heart; on 
“such elevated occasions our community has with one accord 
“turned to Mr. Fraser, to lead their reflections and give eloquent 
“utterance to their sentiments.” 

Judge Bryan also gives us a pleasant sketch of the “Conversa- 
tion Club,” and mentions among the founders Stephen Elliott, 
Grimke, Judge King, the Prioleaus and Gadsdens, Judge Huger, 
and William Crafts, and later Agassiz, Dickson, Bachman, Gil- 
man, Holbrook, Daniel Ravenel, Drayton, Geddings, Ford, 
Moultrie, Simons, Dunkin, and Smyth. 

The Club held for many years its weekly meetings, for it was. 
founded early in the nineteenth century, reorganized in 1842, 
and continued its existence up to the period of the Confederate 


6 


aT 9 ok ae pot 








. 
ta, 
» 


Mrs. SAMUEL PRIOLEAU 


(Catherine Cordes) 


Painted 1818 
(IV a) 


Mrs. SAMUEL PRIOLEAU 
(Catherine Cordes) 


Painted 1823 
(IV b) 














War, after which it was revived and lasted for a time longer un- 
der the leadership of Dr. Gabriel E. Manigault. 

The plan of this association was interesting. It met each week 
at the house of a member, who read an essay, or lectured on a 
subject selected by himself, after which the members present dis- 
cussed in an orderly way the essay and its subject. 

A mere glance at the names of the members is enough to ex- 
plain why this Club continued for so long a time to attract those 
eminent in science, art, literature, and social life; while the seek- 
er after knowledge would delight in sitting at the feet of such 
men, and benefiting by the clash of opinion among them. 

We have been given a very partial list of the subjects selected 
by Fraser for his own contributions, and perhaps are surprised 
not to find among them one about that art for which he had 
abandoned his profession of the law. But the list given sug- 
gests well the class of topics upon which a highly cultivated mind 
dwelt, and about which he would gladly note the reactions in 
other minds of similar calibre. 

These essays listed by Judge Bryan are on: Omens; the minor 
Latin Poets; the Puritans; the poetry of the Pentateuch; Social 
Aristocracy ; Samuel Johnson; Blank Verse; Macbeth; Sibyls; 
Is Society assuming a New Form? 

Of Mr. Fraser’s meetings two were given to his recollections of 
his native town, which led to the publication in 1854 in a more 
extended form of his ‘““Reminiscences of Charleston,” which will 
long remain to give pleasure to every one, curious as to the de- 
velopment and vagaries of opinion through the passing time. 

When a man of more than ordinary intelligence and culture 
recounts to his friends his recollections of his own time and his 
own place, his sayings serve a double purpose. They first of all 
impart his view of the effect produced by changes and upheavals 
of opinion in the community, and in the second place they give a 
very fair idea of his own character and the effect upon it produced 


7 


by stirring events in which he participated. In Mr. Fraser’s case 
the kindly tolerance, shown as he unfolds his tale, is most attrac- 
tive; for he never leaves one in doubt as to his own views, but 
never mingles personal abuse with criticism. He lingers over the 
memories of the irrevocable past, which draw the mind from the 
infelicities that press upon it, and asks himself and his hearers 
“what more interesting series of years could there be in our local 
“history than that which immediately followed the Revolution, 
“when Charleston, after two long years of subjection to a haughty 
“and uncompromising enemy, found itself in the enjoyment of 
“law and liberty,” seeking to recover from suffering and con- 

fusion so long experienced. ye 

The Revolution had left the State in great financial embar- 
rassment with no circulating medium, seeking expedient after 
expedient to supply the want of a currency, which would give 
that security to contracts, which is the great reliance of commer- 
cial intercourse. Relief came from the exertions of her own peo- 
ple, who improved the cultivation of rice and cotton, and who de- 
veloped the export trade in her two staple productions, no longer 
impeded by the British monopoly of the Colonial period, nor by 
the paralysis of non-intercourse, embargo, and war, lasting until 
the long peace following the year 1816. 

Marking the changes in popular sentiment he tells us of the 
extravagant sympathy shown in 1793 with the French revolu- 
tion and of the procession of French and Americans, headed by 
many dignitaries, which marched through the streets to St. Phil- 
ip’s Church where, after two salutes fired by the infantry, they 
heard an oration, sang a Te Deum, and closed with the Mar- 
seillaise. 

After dwelling on the “reproachful excesses” of the times, the 
writer turns our thoughts and sympathies to the unhappy refu- 
gees from St. Domingo, victims of a servile insurrection pro- 
duced by the violences then rending France. These were thrown 


8 











James Remp PRINGLE. 1782-1840 


Painted 1820 


(V a) 





Roperr JAMES TURNBULL. 1774-1833 


Painted between 1830-33 
(V b) 


— 





Ry 








Coronet Wituram ALSTON. 1757-1839 Mrs. Wiitiam Aston. 1769-1838 


Painted 18309 after Morse (Mary Brewton Motte ) 


(VI a) Painted 1839 after Morse 
(VI b) 


. 











in 1793 destitute upon our shores, to be received with kindness 
and hospitality by the people of Charleston. “All who could af- 
“ford shelter to them admitted them into their families; whilst 
“all, who could not do that, relieved them otherwise readily and 
“cheerfully to the very extent of their means. And it is a recol- 
“lection personally gratifying to myself, that I was employed, 
“then a boy, upon errands of charity to those unfortunate be- 
“ings.” : 

The details of the “reproachful excesses,” spoken of above, are 
most curiously contrasted with similar violent proceedings, 
which took place in 1795, only two years afterwards, in opposi- 
tion to Jay’s treaty, when in front of the Exchange on Broad 
Street, his Satanic Majesty was hung upon a gallows in company 
with effigies of John Jay, John Adams, ‘Timothy Pickering, U.S. 
Senator Jacob Read of South Carolina, and William Loughton 
Smith of Charleston. A further revulsion of feeling was shown 
in 1798, when a meeting was held in St. Michael’s Church, which 
resulted in the building of Fort Mechanic by the mechanics of 
Charleston, who contributed their personal labor for the purpose. 
Then two months later another meeting led to the building, on 
Shipyard Creek near the Four Mile House, by popular subscrip- 
tion of the frigate John Adams, named in honor of that great 
man, who was hanged and burnt in effigy in 1795. 

We have not space to follow in detail the psychic changes, 
which men call “politics,” upon which Fraser continues to com- 
ment and with indulgent serenity to distribute blame or com- 
mendation. 

It may be that this well-balanced outlook was the result of 
that attitude of mind and spirit, which Judge Bryan declares 
caused him to be esteemed ever “a wise counsellor,” and it may 
be that his artistic side checked more violent expressions of con- 
demnation amid political storms; for above all things an artist 
desires a well balanced picture. And it is an interesting point in 


9 





Fraser’s miniatures of so many of the distinguished and useful 
men of his day, that his characterization shows a keen knowl- 
edge of men and of public affairs. 

Thanks to the kindness of Prof. Yates Snowden, of the Uni- 
versity of South Carolina, we have before us as an example of 
Fraser’s attitude an unpublished letter of his dated 30 January, 
1833, addressed to his personal friend, Hugh Swinton Legare, 
then Minister at the Court of Belgium. This gives a forcible ac- 
count of the political conditions in South Carolina during the 
Nullification Struggle. No doubt is left on the reader’s mind of 
the personal attitude of the writer, who was suffering with his 
friends from the overwhelming success of the Nullifiers in the 
Convention and in the Legislature. In describing the violence 
of the dominant party, he suggests a limitation which might well 
be applied to such harangues in every day. We permit ourselves 
the following quotation: 

“Their abuse of him (the President of the United States), for 
“the purpose of exasperating the public feeling, extends equally 
“to all the friends of the Union, who quoad hoc are identified with 
“him, and are becoming on that account more and more objects 
“of personal hatred and abhorrence. 

“Your friend P is staining the high character of his elo- 
“quence by an infusion of bitter and relentless vituperation into 
“his public harangues, both here and in Columbia. He surely 
“cannot expect to add to his fame as an orator by the use of such 
“epithets as, ‘wild Beast,’ ‘Toothless Tyger,’ etc., applied to such 
a man and on such an occasion. 

“Invective is a powerful weapon in the hands of a speaker — 
“but, when it degenerates into low abuse, it is very apt to fall 
“where least intended refugo ictu.” 

Again: “I can scarcely believe that I am surrounded with 
“realities —that all is not a mockery and a dream—when I hear 
“men who identified themselves with Carolina, and all that was 





Io 








Master O’Brien Smrru McPuHerson 


Painted 1823 
(VII b) 








Mrs. WittrAm BLAMYER 
(Frances Pogson) 


Painted 1823 
(VII a) 





may 








“honorable and distinguished in her name and character—and 
“who, if they had a distinguishing trait, it was that of ardent pa- 
“triotic devotion to her interest — called Tories and denounced 
“as public enemies, banished from her offices, and thought un- 
“worthy of her confidence and her honors.” 

Yet another extract from this letter may be permitted: “But 
“no more of this painful theme! You invite me to come over in 
“the Spring and join you in a tour you intend in Germany; 
“among the inducements you mention I attach not least impor- 
“tance to that negative one that I would not be missed; this is 
“one of the happy results of that independence which belongs 
“to a private station. . . . If I were there I would leave you to 
“enjoy the living attractions of Taglioni’s dancing and Meyer- 
“beer’s music, for converse with the departed — Rubens — Van- 
“dyke — Teniers — and Ostade, etc.” 


II 


A MEMBER OF THE BAR 
IN CHARLESTON 


Called to the Bar in 1807, Fraser practised Law until 1818, 
and is said to have accumulated a competency before he turned 
from it to follow with success his chosen pursuit. 

Of his life as a lawyer we have little except the above fact. 
But we have his reminiscences of the Bar of Charleston, which 
enlighten us both as to the inner impulses of his own career, and 
as to the salient features of the study and the practice of law in 
his day. A large number of the leading men and of the barristers 
of the revolutionary period had studied their profession at the 
Inns of Courtin London. We find among these William Lough- 
ton Smith, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Thomas Pinckney, 
Dictator John Rutledge, and his brothers Hugh and Edward 
Rutledge, Senator Jacob Read, John Faucheraud Grimke, John 
Julius Pringle, William Henry Drayton, Alexander Moultrie, 
Thomas Lynch, Jr., and numerous others, who led opinions and 
fixed standards. Contemporary with these were “many other 
“distinguished lawyers who continued, long after they had passed 
“away, to maintain that high character for courtesy, learning, 
“and liberality, which their example and practice had imparted 
“to the Charleston Bar.” | 

After listing many causes of the litigation profitable to the 
Bar, Mr. Fraser winds up thus: “and finally Charleston was 
“then divided into two strongly defined parties, to one or other 
“ot which every citizen belonged — that of debtor or creditor.” 

As to the necessary preparation for practice he tells us: “I have 
“heard some of those old lawyers speak of their early habits of 
“study, and their learning was not too lightly earned for its re- 


12 














LAFAYETTE. 1757-1834 Francis KintocH Hucer. 1773-1855 


Painted 1825 Painted 1825 
(VIII a) (VIII b) 


Reproduced through the courtesy of 
Mr. R. T. H. Halsey 





cs 
is 





“ward. Itis not for me to say whether law, as a science, is better 
“understood now than formerly, or its practice more conducive 
“to the ends of justice, nor would it be in place here to enquire 
“whether the modern lawyer is learned in proportion to the in- 
“creased number of his books. But one thing may be safely as- 
“serted, that a law library at the period to which we are now re- 
“ferring, such as probably laid the foundation of an Eldon’s or a 
“Stowell’s attainments, would make but a meagre array on the 
“shelves of a modern American jurist. But the books that com- 
“posed that library were profoundly read and digested. The great 
“fathers of English law were the oracles of the student. His was 
“not the day of digests, and indexes, and abridgments.” 

In speaking of this profession, Fraser touches sadly on the fact 
that many great and learned lawyers have left no other memorial 
of their usefulness and distinction than the records of the Clerk’s 
office or an occasional argument published in the reports of their 
day. Perhaps he had in mind the contrasting thought that the 
mere mention of the name of a great painter brings to mind the 
works upon which his fame is based. 


13 


CO) le Sd % 
BER patra 2 ce 





FRASER’S YEARNING 
FOR ARTISTIC DEVELOPMENT 


During the whole period of his studies and indeed of his prac- 
tice of law, Fraser was constantly assailed by the temptation to 
disregard the wishes and advice of his friends, and to follow his 
artistic bent. 

His early intimacy with Sully, Washington Allston, and Mal- 
bone leads to the suggestion that their companionship had its ef- 
fect in sustaining his wish to devote himself to Art as a profes- 
sion. 

The details of his association with Thomas Sully are to be 
found in the pages of William Dunlap’s “History of the Arts of 
Design in the United States,” published in 1834. 

Sully was born in June, 1783, and was therefore about ten 
months younger than Fraser. He was brought by his father to 
Charleston in 1792, and the year after, at the age of ten, was sent 
to the same school as Fraser. Of the latter, Sully in his later life 
said: “He was the first person that ever took the pains to instruct 
“me in the rudiments of the art, and, although himself a mere 
“tyro, his kindness and the progress made in consequence of it 
“determined the course of my future life.” 

Sully seems to have left Charleston in 1799. 

Washington Allston was born in South Carolina in 1779, and 
was therefore about three years older than Fraser, but his educa- 
tion was received in New England and he graduated from Har- 
vard in 1800, when he returned to South Carolina. While at 
school in Newport he had become acquainted with Malbone a 
short time before the latter removed to Providence at the age of 
seventeen. 


14 











F 








Mrs. JoseEpH SANForD Barker. 
(Henrietta Catherine Gaillard) 


Painted 1826 
(IX a) 





SANFORD BARKER. 


Painted 1826 
CExXab) 


JosEPH 


1774-1858 1771-1842 


| 





pt 


=e 








Mrs. THEODORE GouRDIN 


THEODORE GouRDIN 
Painted 1826 (Elizabeth Gaillard) 


(X a) Painted 1826 
(X b) 


RW 


oe 











When Allston entered college in 1796 he found Malbone in 
Boston, and their “acquaintance soon ripened into friendship.” 
In the winter of 1800 the latter also came to Charleston, where 
“Charles Fraser, since an excellent miniature painter, was then a 
“student at law, but his taste and inclinations were those of an 
“artist. Allston, Malbone, and Fraser must have encouraged in 
“each other the desire that led to their subsequent skill — Mal- 
“Done already a successful practitioner was of course the leader.” 

With his friend Allston he sailed in 1801 for London, whence 
he wrote to Fraser his opinion of the artists, whose work he saw 
there. He returned to Charleston in the winter of 1801, and in 
1805 Mr. Dunlap found him painting in Boston, but suffering 
from the complaint of which he died in Savannah on 7th May, 
1807. 

The above outline of this youthful friendship between these 
four noted painters follows closely Dunlap’s account of it. 

A letter from Fraser to a sister, dated 9 October, 1806, tells of 
a visit in August or September of that year to Newport, where he 
saw Malbone: “Poor Malbone is not in a condition to paint. I 
“am. afraid he is hastening to that bourne whence no traveller can 
“return. He was ill the whole time I remained in Newport.” 

In Flageg’s Life of Allston we find mention of Fraser and of 
Malbone from time to time. Thus Allston writes: 

“On quitting college I returned to Charleston where I had the 
“pleasure to meet Malbone and another friend and artist Charles 
“Fraser, who, by-the-bye, now paints an admirable miniature.” 

And again, speaking of Mr. Bowman, he writes: 

“Malbone, Fraser, and myself were frequent guests at his ta- 
“ble, and delightful parties we always found there.” 

This was evidently Mr. John Bowman, who lies in St. Mi- 
chael’s Churchyard. He married Sabina, daughter of Thomas 
Lynch and sister of Thomas Lynch, Jr., a signer of the Declara- 
tion of Independence. Her first husband had been Col. William 


15 


Cattell, an afore-mentioned first cousin of Charles Fraser. Thom- 
as Lynch, Jr., dying without children, had made his sister Mrs. 
Bowman a considerable legatee under his will. Mr. Bowman 
died in 1807. 


16 


FRASER’S VISITS TO THE 
‘z NORTHERN STATES 


During the period of his law-studies, Fraser must have made 
several visits to the Northern States. In a letter written at New 
Haven, 5th September, 1806, he speaks of friends in various 
places as if he had memories of them from previous visits. 

He dwells a little on the pleasant days he had spent in Boston 
while on this visit. From this point he had made an excursion to 
Portsmouth, Salem, and Newburyport. Passing through Boston 
on his return he had dined with Mr. Winthrop, and passed the 
evening with Mr. Mason. Thence to Providence, which he found 
a delightful place, and there he played on the organ in the Con- 
gregational Church for some ladies. Then to see again his friends 
he went to Newport, where he had received many cordial civili- 
ties, and of which he found the society charming. He arrived at 
New Haven the day before the Commencement ball, at which he 
saw 180 ladies and as many gentlemen. After a visit to Stafford 
Springs and Hartford, he found himself with his cousin, Thomas 
Smith Grimke, staying in a cottage three miles from New Haven 
on a little farm very delightfully situated. He describes it as ly- 
ing “at the foot of some lofty hills and embosomed in fruit trees ; 
“the road passes very near it, so that while we enjoyed all the | 
“pleasure of retirement we could see the company that passed. 
“Our good old Landlady, though she could not furnish our table 
“with dainties, was still very studious to please our appetites. 
“We had plenty of eggs and fresh butter and other such things 
“that the country affords: there was likewise a cider press from 
“which we could always procure sweet cider. The fruit trees were 
“scattered in such abundance around, that they were absolutely 


17 


“wasted, the ground near the orchard was always strewed with 
“apples, pears, and peaches. This is very generally the case at 
“this season throughout Connecticut. On the summit of the 
“neighboring hills I could always enjoy the most charming pros- 
“pects: they are three hundred feet high. I clambered their sides 
“so often that I could at length ascend them with as much alert- 
“ness as a Swiss peasant would do, I assure you I left this agree- 
“able retreat with the greatest reluctance.” 

One cannot but ask whether this charming retreat still exists! 

In New York, Fraser went to see Col. Trumbull, who showed 
him his pictures of the Sortie of Gibraltar, the Battle of Bunker 
Hill, and others; and he found the artist “very polite,” which 
made him sorry they were to part so soon. 

In Boston he saw Stuart, who “was painting very industrious- 
“ly and had all the beauty and talents of Boston under his pen- 
“cil.” He says with a certain naiveté: “I endeavored to recom- 
“mend myself to him by some handsome compliments, but he is 
“so accustomed to the adulation of the multitude, that he re- 
“ceived them with indifference and rather as his due, than as the 
“free offering of admiration.” 

There he also met Field, of whom he says: “There is a minia- 
“ture painter there named Field, who associates with the first 
“circles; he is a fine artist. I received many attentions from him.” 

In Philadelphia he saw an exhibition of pictures by an artist 
whom he did not name. This painter had settled in Virginia as a 
farmer, having come from Europe about nine years previously. 
Some persons, discovering his talents, had recommended him to 
exhibit these paintings. Fraser declares that he was quite delight- 
ed with them, as they showed uncommon merit. Doubtless the 
name could be easily supplied. 

Quotations have been made rather freely from these letters, 
written to his sister when he was barely twenty-four years of age, 
the year before his admission to the Bar, because they seem to 


18 








Mrs. Mircuett Kine 
(Henrietta Campbell) 


Painted 1826 
(Xia) 


Dr. Epwarp 
Date 





SRR chagemar RR 


WasuincTon NortuH. 1778-1843 


uncertain. Probably 1820-25 


(XI b) 














give evidence both of the alertness of his mind and of the irresist- 
ible pressure towards that, which, after the lapse of twelve years, 
was to make the occupation of his matured life. 

We have had access to but a few of these unrestrained letters 
to ladies of his family, so that we cannot follow clearly the steady 
development of his artistic inclinations. 

How filled his mind continued to be with these thoughts may 
be seen by a letter written from Charleston, 7 September, 1810, 
to his niece, Miss Mary Winthrop, only seven years his junior, 
then in Philadelphia, in which he says: “Before you write to me 


“next, I request that you will visit the Academy of Arts, where 


“you will see two celebrated pictures of Mr. West’s, and describe 
“them to me. I am astonished at your having been so long in 
“Philadelphia without seeing them. I impose this as a duty upon 
“you.” | 

Six years later in 1816 he wrote again to the same niece. We 
find him again making a summer visit to the North, where after 
a visit to the Springs, he made his headquarters in New York, 
whence he made excursions up the North River, to Staten Is- 
land, and “to a place called Rockaway, a Sea Shore settlement on 
“Long Island.” While there, he received most friendly atten- 
tions from Mr. Norton, “whose hospitality was truly Carolin- 
“an.” 

With Mr. Norton he went about twelve miles to a great natu- 
ral curiosity, called the Hempstead Plains — about five miles by 
ten or twelve without a single tree—they went there early and 
amused themselves with shooting. 

On the day before writing he had “dined in a large family party 
“with Francis (Mr. Francis Bayard Winthrop). I could not help 
“wishing that you and Jane were amongst the group, as all your 
“Aunts and Uncles were present, and expressed a great wish to 
“see you again. Your Uncle William, who returned lately from 
“his western expedition, went immediately to New London for 


19. 


“your Aunts, who are now in New York. I expect by the fam- 
“ily’s all meeting together that Cousin Charlotte is soon to be 
“married —Mr. A.—is the facsimile of Dehon.” The letter 
wound up with a postscript: “Cousin Harriett wrote to you by 
“the Telegraph.” 

The above allusion is explained by the following notice in the 
New York Evening Post of 19 November, 1816: “Married, yes- 
“terday, by the Right Rev. Bishop Hobart, Mr. John M. Aspin- 
“wall to Miss Charlotte Ann Winthrop, daughter’ of Francis 
“B. Winthrop, Esq.” 

Again in 1824 we find him in Boston. On 8th September of 
that year he wrote a long letter to his sister, Miss Susan Fraser, 
in which he tells of a week spent in Northampton on the Connec- 
ticut River, and of that place he speaks in glowing terms. 

“Tt is surrounded with the most beautiful scenery I ever saw; 
“there is a meadow lying between the town and the river six thou- 
“sand acres in extent all under one enclosure, but owned and 
“planted by different farmers whose lands are divided by mere 
“lines without walls or fences. On the back of the town is a beau- 
“tiful hill, called Round Hill, on the declivity of which is the fa- 
“mous Academy, at which Mrs. Wilson’s grandson is placed; it 
“occupies three elegant buildings, originally built by three broth- 
“ers, who intended them for their seats, but were obliged to sell 
“them. These houses command a very extensive view of the 
“town, the river, the mountains, and several villages with their 
“spires. The town is singularly laid out, the streets follow the 
“paths originally made by the cattle and are therefore in con- 
“tinued curves; they are wide and shaded with large elms; the 
“houses are well built, and many of them elegant. From what I 
“saw of the society I formed a very favorable opinion of the man- 
“ners and habits of the place. They are polished and intelligent 
“people, and to give you an idea of the harmony with which they 
“lived, there is but one congregation and one Church in a popu- 


20 


x3 1 


Upepee aoe 
gai 


NSD Sa oh aera a 





ae 





Lan in 


ee 


“lation of three thousand persons.” 

At Boston “I arrived on Wednesday afternoon last, just in 
“time for an elegant and crowded party at Mrs. Winthrop’s, 
“where I saw the beauty and fashion of the City. The evening 
“after I was at another party at Mrs. Derby’s” ... . . 

In 1806 he had met Gilbert Stuart, and saw him again during 
this yisit. We quote the following allusion to Fraser’s minia- 
ture of himself, reproduced in these pages: “I shewed him my 
“picture and he appeared delighted with it. Indeed he said that 
“he scarcely or never had seen a head on ivory which he preferred 
“to it. If he had said nothing I would still have been much flat- 
“tered, for he held it in his hands a half hour, looking at it. 

“T have also seen Mr. Allston and dined with him. He would 
“not show me his great picture of Belshazzar’s feast. He has been 
“seven years engaged on it, and it is not finished yet.” 

He closes this letter thus: “I came to Boston too late to see the 
“splendid proceedings for Lafayette. I saw him the day before 
“he left here.” 

On 17th September, 1824, he wrote again from Boston to Miss 
Mary Winthrop. This letter is very interesting. He begins by de- 
ploring the news about the epidemic of Yellow Fever in Charles- 
ton. Then turning to brighter things he says: “The Northern 


“folks are enjoying themselves in the midst of every comfort. 


“There has been a carnival in every city here this summer; each 
“striving with its neighbors in the Honors paid to Lafayette .... 
“The people of Charleston may give him a hearty and hospitable 
“welcome, but they will show their prudence in not endeavoring 
“to vie with the Northern cities in parade and pageantry. 

“Since my stay here I have received great attention from your 
“uncle (Mr. Thomas Lindall Winthrop) and all his family. I 
“still think him one of the handsomest men of his age I ever saw; 
“and Mrs. W. looks as young as one of her daughters. I dined 
“at their house yesterday in a large and elegant party. The Gov- 


21 


“ernor and his Lady, Commodore Bainbridge and Lady, and Mr. 
“and Mrs. John Q. Adams, Secretary of State, with other dis- 
“tinguished individuals were of the company. As your uncle 
“lives near the Common, an artillery company, hearing of the 
“assemblage of so many great folks at his house, drew up on the 
“Common opposite to it, and during the dessert began to fire 
“their six-pounders very unexpectedly, for at the first discharge 
“T almost jumped out of my seat, as did the lady next to me. The 
“Governor sent out his aid to stop it, but they were such expert 
“artillerists that they got through the Salute before he could be 
ATU bee magic pica I see Mr. Allston and Mr. Stuart often. Mr. S. 
“receives me rather as an old friend than a new acquaintance. 
“He appears delighted with my pictures, and tells me that I have 
“found out the secret which he has always been laboring for. He 
“assures me with an oath that he had not seen such a miniature 
“for thirty years as my likeness ; he said he wished we could paint 
“six months together. I may appear vain in telling you this, but 
“to be praised by so distinguished a man 1s no ordinary gratifica- 
“tion to a painter’s vanity. When I went to see the old gentle- 
“man the other evening, he accosted me with these words: ‘Mr. 
“F., I am perfectly delighted to see you—I have been thinking. 
“of you sleeping and waking ever since I last saw you.’” 

No apology is made for inserting these long extracts from his 
letters. ‘The chief regret is that the letters are so few. When one 
sees a mention of F'raser’s journal in one of them there is an ab- 
solute sense of serious loss. 

The unfeigned pleasure Mr. Fraser seems from above quota- 
tions to have taken in his impressions of the scenery of New Eng- 
land and of the social life in its cities makes us regret the loss of 
so many of these descriptive letters, and especially of those he 
must have written when he was painting in Hartford in 1831, 


as we are told he did by Dr. Gibbes. 


22 





Henry Deas. 1770-1846 


Painted between 1828 and 1835 


(XIII a) 





ATHANIEL HEyYwarp. 


Painted 18209 
(XIII b) 





1766-1851 





- 


ut 


*» 





VISIT OF LAFAYETTE TO CHARLESTON 


We come now to Mr. Fraser’s part in the enthusiastic welcome 
given to Lafayette when he reached Charleston in 1825. 

It may be remembered that Lafayette in 1794 was imprisoned 
in the Austrian Fortress of Olmutz. Dr. Justus Eric Bollman, 
who had discovered Lafayette’s presence there, was engaged in a 
plot to effect his rescue. At a coffee-house in Vienna he met a 
young American, Francis Kinloch Huger, there studying medi- 
cine, and discovered that his father, Major Benjamin Huger of 
the Continental Line, had welcomed Lafayette and DeKalb at 
his house on the coast of South Carolina when they first landed 
in America, and had escorted them to Charles Town. 

Perceiving the interest young Huger took in the fate of the 
prisoner, Dr. Bollman asked his assistance in the proposed res- 
cue. The story has been so often told that we need not repeat it 
here, except to remind the reader that Huger was captured near 
the scene of the exploit, Lafayette at a village some thirty miles 
away, and Bollman at Waldenburg in Silesia. Upon Huger’s re- 
lease from his painful imprisonment he returned to America and 
completed his medical education at the University of Pennsyl- 
vania, taking his degree in 1797. 

In 1798, when the war with France was threatened, he was giv- 
en a Captain’s commission in the United States Army, and later 
in 1812 he again joined the Army with the rank of Colonel. 

In 1824, Col. Huger met Lafayette in New York, and accom- 
panied him when he visited Yorktown. Then when Lafayette 
came to Columbia he joined him there and accompanied him to 
Charleston. | 

Then it was that Fraser painted for the City of Charleston a 


23 


miniature of Lafayette, which still is held at the City Hall among 
the historical portraits there. At the same time he painted a min- 
iature of Col. Huger for the City to present to their visitor. About 
this last Lafayette after his return to France wrote as follows to 
Col. Huger: “Your admirable miniature portrait while it every 
“day excites my gratitude to the City Council, and the feeling 
“interest of all newcomers to LaGrange, has also produced an- 
“other kind of excitement among the artists of Paris. It is an ad- 
“ditional obligation I have to Mr. Fraser. I am proud to show 
“this beautiful specimen of American Art; my patriotic feelings 
“on the occasion have had full enjoyment. 

“You know I have sat also to Mr. Fraser, to whom, when you see 
“him, I beg you to present my friendly and grateful compli- 
“ments.” 

And again to General Youngblood on 30th December, 1826, 
he wrote: “Remember me to your good Intendant (Samuel Pri- 
“oleau). Mr. Fraser’s admirable portrait of my friend and bene- 
“factor, Huger, is considered a very high specimen of the state of 
“the arts in the United States. Be pleased to present my compli- 
“ments to him.” 

At the sale in New York in 1912 by the then Marquis de La- 
fayette (a descendant in the female line) of the souvenirs of Genl. 
the Marquis de Lafayette, this miniature was sold, and became 
the property of Mr. R. T. H. Halsey, in whose collection it now is. 


24 





THE FRASER GALLERY IN 1857 


After thus following such salient events of his life as are known 
in our day, and especially after noting the atmosphere, and the 
influences, and the friendships, which tended to develop his mind 
and character, we cannot wonder at the outburst of appreciation 
when the FraserGallery was opened in 1857. This was suggested 
by an appeal to the public signed by Judge Mitchell King, Mr. 
Daniel Ravenel, Rev. Samuel Gilman (the writer of Fair Har- 
vard), Dr. Samuel Henry Dickson, Mr. George S. Bryan (later 
U.S. District Judge), Prof. Frederick A. Porcher of the College 
of Charleston, Mr. George W. Flagg (the well known artist) , Mr. 
John Ashe Alston, and Mr. James H. Taylor. 

It was welcomed with cordial approval, and personal aid was 
kindly given to the project by many ladies and gentlemen ; a por- 
trait of Mr. Fraser by George W. Flagg was placed on a panel 
opposite to the door; and in generous response three hundred 
and thirteen (313) miniature paintings and one hundred and 
thirty-nine (139) oil paintings and other pieces were placed by 
their owners at the disposal of the hanging committee. 

It seems surprising that they were able to collect so many of 
the productions of such a long term of years; yet a very large 
number of others, known to exist, could not for various reasons 
be added to the exhibition. 

Quite a number of those not exhibited have been kindly lent 
to the writer for this review of the artist’s work in miniature 
painting. 

This exhibition of 1857 was intended to and did serve a double 
purpose, for, first, it enabled the visitors to realize for themselves 
the ability of one who for “more than a half-century had been 


25 


engaged in the delineation of their friends and neighbors as a 
labor of love and a productive interest in art”; and, secondly, it 
afforded a younger generation an opportunity of meeting among 
the creations of his taste and skill that venerable man, who for a 
lifetime had stood among the foremost of the community in all 
that led to its elevation. For Mr. Fraser almost daily visited his 
exhibition, and walked around the room on the arm of an old 
friend or young companion, indulging in recollections of his life 
and criticisms of his own pictures. 

This description of the exhibition follows very closely the ac- 
counts given of it by Dr. Gibbes and Judge Bryan. 

But it is well to call attention to the fact that quite a number 
of the miniatures exhibited were painted as duplicates or tripli- 
cates, and these appear in the list, where some are called “copies.” 
It is impossible in most cases to be sure which are the replicas 
and which the originals, when all are not before us. It also gives 
rise to certain discrepancies as to dates, for it is not always clear 
whether a date refers to an original or to a replica painted later. 
An effort has been made, where possible, to correct or to explain 
such uncertainties. 

At the date of this Exhibition, Mr. Fraser was approaching 
steadily the end of his honored life. His eyesight began to fail 
and slight paralytic strokes were to leave him more and more en- 
feebled, until on 5th October, 1860, he rested forever from his la- 
bours. 

He was buried amongst his kindred in St. Michael’s Church- 
yard. 

Full obituary notices appeared in the papers of the day after 
his death, from one of which is given the following extract: “A 
“most singular and striking coincidence may be found in the fact 
“of his having breathed his last almost simultaneously with 
Cerna Peale, the great go Artist, whose decease 

“is noticed in our telegraphic columns.” 


26 





Miss Harrietr LownveEs 


(Married Gov. William Aiken) 


Painted 1831 
(XIV a) 








Mrs. Harris Simons. 1811-1878 
(Mary Ion Wragg) 


Painted 1830 
(XIV b) 








In point of fact, Peale’s death is given as on October 3rd, in a 
note to the last edition of Dunlap. 


27 





A REVIEW OF FRASER’S WORK IN 
MINATURE PAINTING 


Attempting to formulate a critical appreciation of the work of 
Charles Fraser in miniature painting, we find ourselves regret- 
ting that there is no complete authoritative list of his many pro- 
ductions. Most of his personal papers seem to have disappeared 
during the Confederate War, yet from an allusion in a letter we 
are led to believe that he at one time kept a journal. On the other 
hand, living at the centre of his work among people who have 
valued and cherished his portraiture of their kindred, we have 
found it possible through their kindness to assemble at one place 
and time many of those miniatures, which are still within reach. 
The miniatures shown in the Fraser Gallery of 1857 were in 
number three hundred and thirteen, and Mrs. Samuel Gilman, 
the authoress of “The Southern Matron,” appears to have known 
of more than one hundred and fifty others, which were not loaned 
for that exhibition. | 

The comments upon his work, which follow, are based upon 
the study of over one hundred of his miniatures covering the 
whole period during which he worked, and the examples chosen 
for reproduction have been selected with the view of showing 
specimens of his various periods, and not only for their artistic 
and historical value. 

This was not very difficult to do, as the catalogue of the Gal- 
lery (1857) gives the dates of many, though not invariably cor- 
rectly ; and of most of the others it was easy to approximate the 
dates from knowledge of the personal history of the subjects. 

In making this selection we have had the valued assistance of 
Miss Leila Waring, whose opinions carry weight, because she 


28 








1802-1891 


GRAHAM. 


Duncan NATHANIEL IN 


Painted 1830 


(XV) 








~ 








herself is well-known as the painter of beautiful miniatures of 
this day. It may be interesting to note here that Miss Waring 
is descended from the Malbone family, which gave to America 
the unsurpassed Edward Greene Malbone, whose existing work 
shows what an irreparable loss his early death was to the artistic 
life of the country. 

When Fraser first began to paint miniatures in 1800, as a 
young man of eighteen years of age, following for pleasure his 
own artistic bent, and in friendly association with Malbone, who 
was then painting professionally, his work, although good and 
often excellent, had not the developed style into which he grew 
when he himself entered upon his professional artistic career in 
1818. We are told that a French painter, named Belzons, was 
his first master, but from lack of knowledge of Belzons’ own work 
we cannot estimate his influence upon his pupil’s style, but of 
Malbone’s influence there can be no doubt. There are even cer- 
tain miniatures by Fraser that might easily be attributed to Mal- 
bone. 

In the work of 1818 we begin to see a different handling, but 
without an entire loss of his former method, which resulted in 
some very fine miniatures during the next decade. 

As we approach 1830, his own distinctive style becomes very 
sure and beautiful, and probably owes something to the greater 
familiarity with the work of others, made possible by his frequent 
visits to the North, and by the temporary sojourn in Charleston 
of many noted painters of the day. 

He employed more of the stipple and less of the cross-hatch- 
ing; and one of the very fine points, shown in his color-schemes, 
reaches perhaps its highest mark. This point is his use of grey 
backgrounds — but grey with differences ; grey like the feathers 
of a dove, shading sometimes blue, sometimes yellow; grey with 
a green or perhaps a warm pinkish tone, but always luminous 
and never muddy. At all periods he introduced occasionally 


29 


clouds and blue sky; but these grey backgrounds he is apt to 
break in his rectangular miniatures with a column or the edge of 
a wall or window. His flesh tones are almost always fresh and 
transparent, and the modelling very delicately yet firmly done. 

After about 1840 there is to be noted a change in his style; but, 
as few examples of the following decade have been available for 
this examination, this opinion may have been formed on insuffi- 
cient numbers. The work seems to be broader and coarser, but 
that he sometimes equalled his former average is shown by the 
reproduction of the very charming miniature of Miss Elizabeth 
Sarah Faber, painted in 1846. 

Another of our reproductions, that of his nephew, Frederick 
Grimke Fraser, dated in the catalogue as late as 1852, was paint- 
ed with his customary keenness of characterization, but in the 
broader style mentioned above. 

His grasp of character throughout his career is amazing, and 
he is uncompromising in his delineation. His sitters are before 
you, looking out at you, and you may like them or you may not, 
just as you may or may not care for an acquaintance; but they 
seem ready to take their part in conversation with you on any 
subject. ‘They are not there to be observed — they are individu- 
als to be considered. Such is the impression made by a gathering 
of Fraser miniatures! Perhaps this is because of the painter’s 
own attitude towards his subjects. He knewthem! Their lives 
and his moved on together, and he presented the individuality of 
each. This is shown markedly in his portraiture of the long line 
of notable men, who helped to make the history of his time, and 
with most of whom he had intimate and personal association. 
‘The few portraits of children among those assembled before us 
show a lack of good proportion and drawing in the bodies, al- 
though the heads are treated with freshness and sweetness. 

In portraiture a column and a small landscape in the back- 
ground have always been much used, and this seems quite in 


30 





Mrs. SAMUEL GAILLARD BARKER. 


(Ellen Milliken) 


Painted 1831 
(XVI a) 


1807-1874 





Mes Wittiam ELNATHAN HASKELL 


(Susannah S. Ball) 


Painted about 1831 
(XVI b) 


me 





ne tee, 


> 


Charleston, where the “piazza” or gallery plays such a 


cellence. Where occasionally a miniature falls below his stand- 


.s 


_ard, yet there are many that reach the highest grade. 

















COMMENTS ON 
MINIATURES REPRODUCED 


Frontispiece. 
CHARLES FRASER 
1782 - 1860 
By himself. 
Painted in 1823. 


This miniature of Charles Fraser by himself is the one which 
was shown by him to Gilbert Stuart in Boston, as told by his let- 
ters of 8th and 17th September, 1824, elsewhere quoted. See 
pages 22 and 23. 


No. la 


JANE WINTHROP 
1792 - 1862 
Painted in 1802. 

This is an early miniature of his little niece, painted when the 
artist was twenty years old. 

It is fresh and lovely in color, but less subtle than his later 
work, the pink of the complexion and the blue of the sky having 
a less restrained quality than his subsequent color schemes. 

This is one of the miniatures painted before he developed his 
more individual style. 


No. Ib 
FREDERICK FRASER 
1762 - 1816 
Painted in 1810. 
This is on a much smaller ivory than that of Jane Winthrop. 


a5 


It represents an older brother of the artist. 

The coloring of this miniature is very quiet, and the touch 1s 
less free and assured than in his later work; but it is both pleas- 
ant and well sustained in style. This is one of those miniatures 
of undoubted authenticity, which show that Fraser made vari- 
ous experiments in treatment before he settled down into the 
manner that has become so markedly associated with him. 


No. Ila 
Tuomas Wricut Bacor 
1765 - 1834 
Painted in 1818. 

This is given here as a contrast to the portrait of Edward 
Cotesworth Rutledge, painted in the same year. 

The color of this miniature has obviously been changed by 
fading, but fortunately the characteristics of the portraiture re- 
main, and the individuality of Mr. Bacot is apparent in the re- 
production. 

Appointed Postmaster of Charleston in January, 1794, dur- 
ing Washington’s administration, he held the office with the re- 
spect and regard of the community for forty-one years through- 
out the political turmoils and vicissitudes of that period, under 
Washington, John Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, John 
Quincy Adams, and Jackson until his death in 1834, when his 
successor, Alfred Huger, was appointed, to remain in the office 
until 1865. 


No. IIb 


Epwarp CoTrEswortTH RUTLEDGE 
1798 - 1860 
Painted in 18178. 


This fine miniature is an example of the artist’s work after he 
P 


34 








had finally abandoned the legal profession for that of an artist. 
It is painted with freedom and has caught the spirit of a young 

naval officer with his life before him. | 

~ It may be well to mention that Captain Rutledge was the 

father of Mrs. St. Julien Ravenel, to whom we owe that interest- 

ing and valuable volume, “Charleston, the Place, and the Peo- 

ple.” 


No. IIIa 
Joun RUTLEDGE 
1739 - 1800 
Painted in 1818 after Trumbull. 


No. IIIb 
CHARLES CoTEsworTH PINCKNEY 
1746 - 1825 
Painted in 1823. 

The miniatures of these two great men were placed next to 
each other in the Fraser Gallery, and with the same intention are 
so reproduced here, even though the miniature of Rutledge is 
after a portrait by Trumbull painted in the previous century, and 
that of Pinckney in 1823 in his old age. 

The artist’s close personal intimacy with both of these men 
had a marked influence on the development of his character and 
mental lite. For they were conspicuous in the fine group of high- 
ly educated men, who carried South Carolina through the Revo- 
lution, and of whom it may be permissible to quote the panegyric 
of the historian Bancroft: | 
“Left mainly to her own resources, it was through the depths of 
“wretchedness that her sons were to bring her back to her place 
“in the republic after suffering more and daring more and achiev- 
“ing more than the men of any other State.” 


35 


John Rutledge was admitted to the Bar in London, where he 
was a student of the Temple, and returned to Carolina in 1761. 
He was a member of the first General Congress in 1765; of the 
South Carolina Provincial Congress in 1774; a delegate to the 
General Congress in 1774; also in 1775 ; President of South Car- 
olina under the Constitution of March, 1776, adopted before the 
Declaration of Independence; again in 1779 Governor of South 
Carolina; given the powers of a Dictator by the Assembly in 
1780, he exercised these until 1782; a delegate to the Continental 
Congress in 1782 and in 1783; in 1784 a Chancellor of the State 
of South Carolina; in 1787 a member of the Convention which 
framed the Federal Constitution, where he was chairman of the 
Committee of Detail appointed to prepare and report a draught 
of the Constitution ; in 1789 an associate Justice of the Supreme 
Court of the United States ; in 1791 Chief Justice of South Caro- 
lina; in 1795 appointed by Washington, Chief Justice of the 
United States, presiding for one term only. 

His career is thus summed up by Judge O’Neall in his “Bench 
and Bar of South Carolina”: “Few men have lived who were 
“sreater than John Rutledge, and few will ever live who can ex- 
cel him.” 

Charles Cotesworth Pinckney studied law in the Middle Tem- 
ple, London, where he was admitted to the Bar. He returned to 
Carolina in 1769. In 1775 he was a member of the first Provin- 
cial Congress of South Carolina; in 1775 he received the Com- 
mission of a Captain in the 2nd Regiment of South Carolina, of 
which Moultrie was Colonel; and in 1776 had attained the Colo- 
nelcy ; in 1780 a prisoner at the capture of Charles Town, South 
Carolina; in 1783 brevetted a Brigadier-General. At the end of 
the war he resumed the practice of the law, and in 1787 was a 
member of the Constitutional Convention of the United States ; 
in 1796 appointed by Washington Minister to France; in 1798 
commissioned a Major-General in the Army of the United States. 


36 













Joun McPuerson Prince. 1811-1831 JAmes Heywarp TRrapier. 1814-1865 


Painted 1830 Painted 1833 
(XVIII a) (XVIII b) 








Ropert BARNWELL. 1761-1814 


Painted about 1833 from 
another miniature 


(XIX) 


# 








In 1800, and again in 1804, and again in 1808 he was put forward 
as a Federalist Candidate for the Presidency, and was defeated 
by Thomas Jefferson and by Madison, the Republican (Demo- 
cratic) candidates. He died in 1825 in his eightieth year. His 
epitaph was written by Charles Fraser, and may be seen on the 
wall of St. Michael’s Church in Charleston. 

General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney was President General 
of the Society of the Cincinnati from 1805 to his death in 182 5. 


No. IV a 
No. IV b | 
Mrs. SAMuEL PrioLEau 
(Catherine Cordes) 
Painted in 1818 and in 1823. 

Mrs. Samuel Prioleau appears in the Fraser Gallery under 
three numbers, Nos. 160, 161, 162. 

The comparison of the two miniatures before us, owned re- 
spectively by Mrs. Brewton Hamilton and Miss Catherine P. 
Ravenel, is interesting. 

In the Catalogue the three there listed are designated as an 


original and two copies, but the two before us seem to be distinct 


portraits. 

Although the pose is the same they face in different directions ; 
the details of the caps and hair are different; and, though the 
kerchief and shawl are nearly the same, there are differences in 
the folding. 

The color-schemes, too, are not alike. The background of the 
one owned by Mrs. Hamilton is a delicate smoke-grey, while 
Miss Ravenel’s shows blue sky and clouds, and as a consequence 
the complexion is treated with greater freshness of color. 

Both are fine pieces of work. 

Mrs. Prioleau’s husband was one of the prominent citizens of 


a7, 


Charles Town sent by the British to St. Augustine as political 
prisoners, when the city was taken by Sir Henry Clinton in 1780. 


No. Va 

James Reip PRINGLE 
| 1782 - 1840 
Painted in 1820. 

This is the earliest Fraser Miniature with a landscape in the 
background that has come under our notice. The figure of Mr. 
Pringle is placed with great boldness well up on the ivory, with a 
cloudy blue sky and the waters of Charleston Harbor, showing 
Castle Pinckney, in the distance. The head is painted with great 
strength and freedom; the black hair and dark eyes and clear 
complexion, with the blue tones of a heavy beard under the skin, 
make a very living personality. As Mr. Pringle was appointed 
Collector of the Port in 1819, this landscape was probably meant 
to be significant. 

From 1814 to 1818 Mr. Pringle was President of the Senate 
of South Carolina. In the heat of the Nullification struggle he 
was put forward by the Union party as a candidate for the In- 
tendancy of Charleston and defeated his opponent, Henry L. 
Pinckney, by a close vote, to be himself defeated by the same op- 
ponent in the next election. | 


No. V b 
Rosert JAmMEs TURNBULL 
1774 - 1833 
Painted between 1830 and 1833. 

Although this miniature was painted much later than that of 
James Reid Pringle, they are placed together because they were 
noted antagonists in the great Nullification contest as leaders of 
the opposing parties. 


38 











Benjamin Faneuit Dunxin. 1792-1874 Mrs. Benyamin Faneurt Dunxin. 1800-1870 


Painted 1835 (Washington Sala Prentiss) 


(XX a) Painted 1835 


(XX b) 


G 











Turnbull was the son of an Englishman who had lived long in 
the Levant, where he married a Greek, and later settled at New 
Smyrna in Florida, where the son was born. Educated in E'ng- 
land, he was admitted to the Bar in Charleston in 1794. Writing 
under the “nom de plume” of Brutus, he took a prominent part 
in the political agitation between 1827 and 1833,and was a mem- 
ber of the Nullification Convention. 

At his death a eulogy was delivered by General James Hamil- 
_ ton, and a striking monument was erected to him in St. Philip’s 
Churchyard by his party. 

A captivating comparison may be made between these two 
miniatures painted a decade apart. Perhaps the stern and set 
expression of Turnbull shows the writer of political controversy, 
who seeks to enforce his views, while the alert questioning look 
on Pringle’s face is that of “one of the most courteous men of his 
day,” searching for signs of responsive conviction, 


No. VI a 
Cox. WitLt1AM Aston 
1757 - 1839 
Painted in 1839 after Morse. 

These miniatures of Col. William and of Mrs. Alston are ex- 
cellent examples of Fraser’s work, as seen at a glance. They ap- 
pear to be Nos. 74 and 75 of the Fraser Gallery where they are 
designated as copies from Morse, painted by Fraser in 1839. As 
Morse was painting in Charleston from 1818 to 1823, the orig- 
inals were probably painted between those dates. In the cata- 
logue of the Gallery there are also mentioned under Nos. 71 and 
72 portraits of Col. and Mrs. Alston, but we have not had the op- 
portunity of comparing them. 

Later copies by Sully give evidence of this history by his in- 
scription, under his well known signature, on the back of his por- 


39 


trait of Mrs. Alston, in 1846, “Copy from Morse and Fraser.” 
In his day Col. Alston was a great social figure in Carolina, 

and belonged to that group of survivors of the Revolution, of 
whom Fraser says in his Reminiscences that it had been for him 
a privilege to have known and conversed with them. He had 
ended that War as the Captain of the Waccamaw Company of 
Marion’s Brigade. Interested in horse-breeding and in racing 
from his youth up, it follows that we learn much of him from Irv- 
ing’s “History of the Turf in South Carolina.” 

Washington’s account of his visit to his plantation on the Wac- 
camaw may be read in his Diary. 


No. VI b 
Mrs. Witi1am ALSTON 
(Mary Brewton Motte) 
1769 - 1838 
Painted in 1839 after Morse. 

Mrs. Alston was the daughter of Rebecca Motte (born Brew- 
ton) , whose name shows forth in the romantic history of the Rev- 
olution as the heroine, who handed to Gen. Marion and Col. Lee 
the arrows with which to carry fire to her own house, fortified by 
the British and called by them Fort Motte. After the death of 
her brother, Miles Brewton, Mrs. Motte occupied his house on 
King Street, and with her three daughters was relegated to the 
garret, when Sir Henry Clinton took possession of the house at 
the fall of Charles ‘Town in 1780. 

This historic house was later bought by Mrs. Motte’s son-in- 
law, Col. William Alston, from whom it passed to his daughter, 
Mrs. William Bull Pringle, and is known to visitors in Charles- 
ton as the Pringle house on King Street. 


40 





James Louis Pericru. 


Painted 1834 
(XXI a) 





1789-1863 








James Hamitton, Jr. 1786-1857 


Painted 1835 
(XXI b) 





* 














No. VII a 
Mrs. WititiaMm BLAMYER 
(Frances Pogson) © 
Painted in 1823. 


Mrs. Blamyer was the daughter of John Pogson of St. Kitts, 
West Indies. Her uncles, Revd. George Pogson and Revd. Mil- 
ward Pogson, were both Clergymen of the Protestant Episcopal 
Church in South Carolina. 


No. VII b 
Master O’Brien SmitHy McPuHerson 
Painted in 1823. 


The boyish charm of this miniature seems to justify its selec- 
tion for reproduction. He was a son of Col. James Elliott Mc- 
Pherson, for many years President of the South Carolina Jockey 
Club. 


No. VIII a 
GENL. Marquis DE LAFAYETTE 
1757 - 1834 
Painted in 1825. 

This miniature was painted for the city of Charleston in 1825, 
when Lafayette visited that place, while on his tour of this coun- 
try. i 

It is today a valued possession of the city, preserved among 
the historical pictures in the City Hall. 


AI 





No. VIII b 
Francis Kintocn Hucer 
1773 - 1855 
Painted in 1825 for the City of Charleston to present to Lafa- 
yette — now (1924) in the collection of Mr. R. T. H. Halsey 
of New York. 

This companion miniature of Col. Francis Kinloch Huger was 
painted at the same time and place as that of Lafayette, and was 
presented by the City Council to their visitor. It cannot be for- 
gotten that Huger in 1794 had, for the unsuccessful attempt to 
rescue Lafayette, suffered likewise a harsh imprisonment in the 
Castle of Olmutz. 

It has been elsewhere noticed that the artist at times placed in 
the backgrounds of his pictures landscapes of marked personal 
significance. In these two pictures they seem to suggest this 
memory. 


No. [Xa 
Mrs. JoseEPH SANFORD BARKER 
(Henrietta Catherine Gaillard) 
1774-1858 
Painted in 1826. 
These portraits of an elderly couple reveal their individualities 
precisely and pleasantly. | 
The coloring and the treatment of both are fine. 


No. IX b 
JosEPH SANFORD BARKER 
1771 - 1842 
Painted in 18206. 
Mr. Barker was born at Newport, Rhode Island, and came to - 
Charleston in his 25th year. 


42 











deomiceeneeieyy se 


Rosert McKewn A.Lian. 1803-1839 Joun Jutius PRINGLE. 1753-1843 


Painted 1835 Painted about 1840 
(XXIII a) (XXIII b) 


ha . 











No. X a 
THEODORE GouRDIN 
Reverse of alocket painted in 1826. 


Mr. and Mrs. Gourdin were both of families identified with 
the Huguenot group, which forms so important a part of social 
and historical South Carolina. 


No. X b 
Mrs. THEODORE GourDIN 
(Elizabeth Gaillard) 
Obverse of a locket painted in 1826. 


The round locket which frames the portraits of Mr. and Mrs. 
Gourdin holds one on either side. 


No. XI a 
Mrs. MircHetit Kine 
(Henrietta Campbell) 
Painted in 1826. 


She was the first wife of Judge King. 

In this miniature the placing of the head upon the ivory is a 
little more massive than is usual with Fraser, but the handling is 
in keeping with the proportions. It is very simple in treatment. 
The tone of the white dress and ruff and of the shawl, also white, 
with a narrow figured border is interesting. The background is 
blue-grey; the hair and eyes dark; the complexion clear and 
even. 

Judge King’s house was long a social and literary centre in 
Charleston, and there are yet one or two who can remember the 
annual balls given there during Race-Week. 


43 


No. XIb 
Dr. Epwarp WasHincton NortTH 
1778 - 1843 
Date uncertain, probably 1820 - 1825. 

Dr. Edward Washington North and his son, Dr. Edward North, 
held their places among the leading men of Charleston for many 
years. The father was Intendant of Charleston in the years 1833- 
35. 

The date of this miniature is uncertain, but the dress and style 
seem to place it between 1820 and 1825. 


No. XII 
Cuar.Les WINTHROP 
1800 - 1833 
Painted in 1827. 


Mr. Charles Winthrop was a nephew of the artist. The min- 
iature may be called a typical Fraser, and is the earliest of a 
group of miniatures reproduced here, which are interesting in- 
dividually and collectively. 

Perhaps all the work of this period from about 1827 to 1835 
had not the same stamp and characteristics, but the examples 
now under our notice of the work of these years are all of a very 
high degree of excellence. The easy mastery of the handling, the 
restrained and quiet richness of the coloring, and the unexagger- 


ated force of the likenesses cannot but give a very high estimate 


of the work of that period. 

Perhaps the most beautiful are the portraits of Charles Win- 
throp (1827), Nathaniel Heyward (1829), Henry Workman 
Conner (1832), John McPherson Pringle (1830), James Hey- 
ward Trapier (1833), James Louis Petigru (1834), Robert James 
Turnbull (1830-33), Mr. and Mrs. Benjamin Faneuil Dunkin 
(1835), Robert McKewn Allan (1835). 


44 








Mrs. Witu1am Rosertson. 1770-1845 Mrs. Benjamin ALLSTON. 1771-1824 


(Susannah Boone Freer) (Charlotte Ann Allston) 


Painted about 1840 (XXIV b) 
(XXIV a) ; : 








conoomad 














Ars. WittrAM Mayrant 


(Ann Richardson) 


Painted about 1840 


Mrs. Henry Gray 
(Yancy Cudworth) 


Painted 1842 
(XXV a) (XXV b) 


ih 








With these may be included the miniatures of Mrs. William 


_ Elnathan Haskell (about 1830), Mrs. Harris Simons (1830), 


Miss Lowndes (1831), Mrs. Samuel G. Barker and Mrs. Henry 
D. Lesesne, both of about that date, as was also that of Mrs. 
Thomas Moore Rhett. 

To this group is added that of Captain Duncan Nathaniel In- 
graham (1830) of international fame. 

Unfortunately this last is known to us only through a litho- 


graph, which, however, shows Captain Ingraham’s fine head giv- 


ing the impression of both thought and fire. 


No. XIII a : 
Hon. Henry Deas 
1770 - 1846 
Undated — between 1828 - 1835. 

Mr. Deas was painted in his robes as President of the Senate 
of South Carolina. 

The white hair and fresh-colored face of the subject of this 
miniature stand out against a green background, the tone of 
which in conjunction with the blue of the robe and the darker 
blue of the coat and vest makes a pleasant and harmonious piece 
of color. 

He was President of the Senate from 1828 to 1835, which years 
covered the period of the Nullification struggle. 


No. XIII b 
NaTHANIEL Heywarp 
1766 - 1851 
Painted in 18209. 
Mr. Heyward in 1840 was among the most successful rice- 
planters in South Carolina, owning a number of valuable plan- 


45 


tations, and his grandchildren made an important group in this 
large and distinguished family. 


The keen and assured expression found in the portraiture is 


not the only excellence of this miniature. It is a fine example of 
Fraser’s masterly use of grey. Against the delicate depth and 
variety of the grey tones of the background, the grey hair and 
even complexion stand forth without effort or exaggeration. The 
dark blue of the coat relieves but does not overcome the delicate 
but quiet scheme of color. 


No. XIV a 

Miss Harriett LOownbEsS 
(Later wife of Gov. William Aiken) 
Painted in 1831. : 


This miniature must have been painted not long before Miss 
Lowndes became Mrs. William Aiken. 

There are interesting points about it. The handling of the 
personality, which is a striking one, is in keeping with it. The 
column, against which the head is posed, is placed exactly in the 
middle of the ivory with sky and clouds on either side; the dark 


hair and eyes and the transparent white dress with scarlet silk 


trimmings and ribands; all these combine to produce a very ar- 
resting effect. 


No. XIV b 
Mrs. Harris Simons 
(Mary T’on Wragg) 
I81I - 1878 : 
Painted in 1830. 


The miniatures of Mrs. Harris Simons and Mrs. Aiken are 
placed together as interesting evidence of Fraser’s skill in por- 


46 


Ee 


om Sirs 


at ae edt aad ts by pe re te 3 he rss - a oo ; 
oe att ay hast a ee rack Bn A Lr EA een ae een mee we 





a 











Georce Smiru Bryan. 


Painted 1845 
(XXVI b) 


1809-1895 














~ 


WituiaAM Catrety Bee. 1809-1881 


Painted about 1845 
(XXVI a) 












“Ss 











traiture. They were daughters of sisters, born [’on, and yet the 
individual characteristics of each show clearly through a marked 
family likeness. 


No. XV 
Duncan Natuaniet IncRAHAM 
1802 - 1891 
(Later Captain, United States Navy 
and Commodore, Confederate States Navy) 
Painted in 1830. 


Our reproduction is from a lithographic copy of this minia- 
ture, made about 1854, but its artistic merits are well shown, 
and it seems proper that so interesting an example of the artist’s 
work should not be entirely lost to this review of it. 

Commodore Ingraham held a high place among the great men 
of the American Navy. The rescue of Martin Kostza from the 
Austrian man-of-war in the harbor of Smyrna in 1853, and the 
well-reasoned audacity with which Commander Ingraham car- 
ried out his purpose in the face of great odds captured the im- 
agination and admiration of the country. This was well ex- 
pressed by the inscription on the medal voted by Congress on 
4th August, 1854, and presented to him by the President of the 
United States. 

Again in January, 1863, his name rose into historic fame, when 
with the two Confederate iron-clads he sallied out of Charles- 
ton Harbor, and put to flight the blockading fleet of ten vessels. 
Men who lived through that period well remember the discus- 
sion of the time as to whether the blockade had or had not been 
effectively broken under the then laws of war. 

Any one interested in the details of these two affairs may find 
them told in “A Forgotten Chapter in our Naval History” by 
Francis B. C. Bradlee, published in 1923 by the Essex Institu- 


47 


tion, Salem, Massachusetts, and in “The Defense of Charleston 
Harbor’ by Major John Johnson. 

The original miniature of Capt. Ingraham and that of Mrs. 
Ingraham (born Laurens), in her wedding dress, were stolen in 
Columbia, South Carolina, when that city was captured by the 
Northern troops in 1865. 


No. XVI a 
Mrs. SAMUEL GAILLARD BARKER 
(Ellen Milliken) 
1807 - 1874 
Painted about 1831. 


These miniatures of Mrs. Barker and of Mrs. Haskell are 
placed together as evidently of the same period. 

The style, pose, and dress seem to support this supposition. 

Mrs. Barker was the mother of Major Theodore Gaillard Bar- 
ker, who was Assistant Adjutant General on the staff of Hamp- 
ton’s and Butler’s Brigade C. S. A., and a pillar of strength dur- 
ing the Reconstruction trouble. 


No. XVI b 
Mrs. WILLIAM ELNATHAN HASKELL 
(Susannah Splatt Ball) 
Painted about 1831. 


Mr. William E. Haskell was descended from Major Elnathan 
Haskell of the Continental Line of Massachusetts, who married 
and settled in South Carolina at the end of the Revolutionary 
War, and whose descendants played a fine part as soldiers in the 
Confederate Army and as leaders during the tribulations of Re- 
construction. 

The subject of this miniature was of an important family, 


48 


which settled on the Cooper River in the first days of the Colony, 
where they have held lands up to the present. 


No. XVII 
Henry WorkMAN CONNER 
1797 - 1861 
Painted in 1832. 7 

This beautiful miniature is among those that reach the high- 
est level of Fraser’s method of handling his oval portraits on 
ivory. The head is placed high in the oval. The clouded sky is 
on a rather higher key than usual; the blue is clear and pale, 
and the clouds lightly worked in very delicate greys. The flesh 
- tones are very fresh and transparent, and yet perfect in the mod- 
elling that gives character to the face. Mr. Conner wears a white 
collar and neckerchief, a dark blue coat with brass buttons, and 
also the canary-yellow vest, which seems to have been the fashion 
of the moment, for several of the portraits of this period show 
variations of it. 

It might be well to compare this with the portraits of James 
Heyward Trapier (1833), of John McPherson Pringle (1830), 
and of James Louis Petigru (1834). 

Mr. Conner in his day was one of the noted men of Charles- 
ton. Without space to follow the activities of his career, it may 
be mentioned that in 1835, on the organization of the Bank of 
Charleston, he was made a director; in 1841 he became its Pres- 
ident ; in 1850 he resigned this position, and became President of 
the South Carolina Rail Road Co., resigning in 1853. At one 
time President of the Chamber of Commerce, at another of the 
Hibernian Society, we find him in his later years the head of a 
banking-house of Charleston and New Orleans, and in 1860, as 
a member of the Convention of the State of South Carolina, he 
signed the Ordinance of Secession. 

He died on 11th January, 1861. 


49 


No. XVIII a 
Joun McPuerson PRINGLE 
| I811r - 1831 
Painted in 1830. 


Fraser was very successful in his delineation of John McPher- 
son Pringle, a son of the Hon. James Reid Pringle. He died, 
when still a young man, in Paris, where he was studying in the 
medical schools. This and the portrait of James Heyward Tra- 
pier (1833) need little comment as to their excellence in the 
painting and in the bringing out of the character. 

The scholarly expression of the medical student, and the as- 
piring ardency of the young military cadet are in admirable con- 
trast. 


No. XVIII b 
| James Heywarp TRAPIER 
1814 - 1865 
(When cadet at West Point 
Later Brigadier General in Confederate States Army) 
Painted in 1833. 


This miniature with the clouded sky, dark hair, fresh com- 
plexion, and dark blue uniform of the subject, is based on color- 
notes used in many others; but in this case there is a richness in 
the tones and assured freedom in the handling that make it of 
very marked artistic beauty, as well as carrying the conviction 
of the true rendering of the individual. 


50 





. 
’ 
i 
i 
, 
' 
4 
. 
: 
! 
‘4 . 
* 
? 
‘ . 
1 
‘ 
n wa 
‘ rae 
4 
. . : 
a Big 
- \ ‘ $ 
‘ 7 . , 


Seth Ver 
Fen bh} hog Be 





No. XIX 
Rosert BARNWELL 
1761 - 1814 
Painted by Fraser about 1833 after a miniature painted in Phil- 
adelphia, 1788-9 while Mr. Barnwell was a member of Con- 
gress. 


Mr. Barnwell was a distinguished man of the post-revolu- 
tionary period. Severely wounded during the Revolution, he 
became a prisoner at the fall of Charles Town in 1780. He 
served as Member of Congress, Speaker of the House in South 
Carolina, and President of the Senate of South Carolina. 

We insert this miniature as a fine specimen of Fraser’s work 
in painting and color. , 

It is not strictly a copy, being avowedly an effort of Mr. Fra- 
ser’s to depict one he had known well, based on an original con- 
sidered unsatisfactory as to the likeness. 


No. XX a 
BENJAMIN FANEUIL DUNKIN 
1792 - 1874 
Painted in 1835. 

Chief Justice Dunkin was one of the ablest judges of the many 
able men who have sat upon the Bench of South Carolina, and 
largely contributed to the high esteem in which that Bench was 
held before the Confederate War. A graduate of Harvard Uni- 
versity he came to Charleston in 1811, and entering as a law stu- 
dent the office of William Drayton, was admitted to the Bar in 
1814. In 1837 he became one of the Chancellors of the Court of 
Equity, and at the reorganization of the State government after 
the Confederate War was for a short time Chief Justice. 

His miniature is a particularly beautiful piece of color and 
the workmanship and characterization are equally fine. The 


51 


thoughtful scholarly face is treated with quiet assurance. The 
background is an even tone of pinkish grey, but very luminous, 
against which the even flesh-tones stand with slight contrast, 
but with great beauty and no weakness. There is no other color. 
The dark hair and eyes and coat and stock give only subtle va- 
riations in different tones of black. 


No. XX b 
Mrs. Benjamin Faneutt DUNKIN 
(Washington Sala Prentiss) 
1800 - 1870 
Painted in 1835. 


The miniature of Mrs. Dunkin was painted at the same time 
as that of her husband and in the same vein of beauty and excel- 
lence. In hers the background is a clouded sky, but it is treated 
with the same even restraint. Her face is pale, though fresh in 
color, and her dark brown hair and eyes are the striking note, as 
with Mr. Dunkin. Additional notes, however, appear in her 
dress, which is yellow-grey, and in a pale yellowish pink scarf 
tied over her lace collar. Altogether these two miniatures make 
a very striking pair. 


No. XXI a 
James Louis Peticru 
1789 - 1863 
Painted in 1834. 

This is an excellent miniature of an able man, the expression 
bearing out Mr. Petigru’s reputation as a jurist and a wit. 

The color scheme is interesting, the artist making use of the 
fresh tones of the face and the black and white of the clothes, 
showing a line of the yellow vest. All this stands against one of 
Fraser’s characteristic transparent grey backgrounds. 


52 


ee oe 








FREDERICK GrRIMKE FRASER 


Painted about 1852 
(XXVIII a) 








Master JAMes Butter CAMPBELL, JR. 


Painted 1845 
(XXVIII b) 











Mr. Petigru was among the leaders of the Union party, while 
Gov. James Hamilton, Jr., was a leader of the Nullifiers, yet 
their partnership in the practice of the Law, commencing in 
1820, was followed by a close alliance in business and friend- 
ship, which lasted until the death of Hamilton in 1857. 

Much has been said and implied about Mr. Petigru’s avowed 
later opposition to Secession and the attitude of his neighbors 
towards him, yet the plain fact remains that he continued in the 
service of his State, and received his salary as Code Commis- 
sioner until the completion of his work, not long before his death, 
a fact creditable both to his State and to himself. 


No. XXI b : 
GENERAL JAMES HamiItTon, JR. 
1786 - 1857 

Painted in 1835. 


General Hamilton was the son of Major James Hamilton of 
the Continental Line of Pennsylvania, who married and settled 
in Carolina at the close of the Revolution. 

The son’s public career was continuous, culminating in the 
governorship of South Carolina and in the presidency of the Nul- 
lification Convention. 

General Hamilton was succeeded as Governor by Robert Y. 
Hayne, and was himself appointed to command the forces of the 

State in the possible military collision. 
_ His association with Petigru both in business and friendship 
continued until his death in a marine disaster in the Gulf of 
Mexico. 

This miniature is both boldly and carefully painted and pre- 
sents General Hamilton in his uniform as an officer of the State’s 
forces. 


53 


No. XXII a 
Miss Rosamunp Mites PRINGLE 
1823 - I919 

Painted in 1839. 

A daughter of Hon. James Reid Pringle, painted when she 
was about sixteen years of age. 

She is represented as in a garden with a few blossoms in her 
hand; her hair and eyes dark; wearing a lavender dress, cut low 
with full sleeves. 


No. XXII b 
Mrs. Henry LesEsNE 
(Harriette Petigru) 
1814 - 1877 
Painted about 1834. 


The wife of Chancellor Henry Deas Lesesne, and sister of 
James L. Petigru. 

This miniature is smaller than the usual size of Fraser’s rec- 
tangular miniatures, and rather more closely and finely painted. 
The face is lovely with straight features and dark hair and eyes. 
Over the grey satin dress she wears a black scarf lined with pink. 
The background is a brown-grey wall, and through a window is © 
shown a landscape with a blue sky and a floating purplish cloud. 


No. XXIII a 
Rosert McKewn ALLAN 
1803 - 1839 
Painted in 1835. 
The father of Robert McKewn Allan came from Scotland, 
and married a Miss Haig of the well-known family connection 
of the McKewns and Haigs of South Carolina. 


54 


This miniature is a lovely and delicate piece of color. The 
rather pale complexion, the grey column, the sky, and the land- 
scape are treated with Fraser’s usual delicate sense of harmony. 
The unobtrusive greens in the little landscape are also felt in the 
greys of the background, in the brown of the hair, and in the 
black stock. 


No. XXIIT b 
Joun JuLius PRINGLE 
1753 - 1843 
Painted about 1840. 

This is the portrait of an old man near his ninetieth year. 

The miniature was painted in triplicate, one for each of his 
three daughters, and Fraser has rendered charmingly the beauty 
of dignified old age. But the number of his years makes it evi- 
dent that the activities of his life lay far behind him. 

He was a student of the Temple at the outbreak of the Revo- 
lution, when he went over to France, and became Secretary to 
Mr. Ralph Izard, one of the Commissioners appointed by Con- 
gress to European Courts. 

After serving as Speaker of the Assembly, he was appointed 
District Attorney by General Washington, and later was for six- 
teen years Attorney General of his State. In 1805 he declined 
the appointment of Attorney General of the United States, urged 
upon him by Jefferson, and for a long period was a leader of the 
Bar in South Carolina. 


No. XXIV a 
Mrs. WILLIAM RoBERTSON 
(Susannah Boone Freer) 


1770 - 1845 
Undated — about 1840. 
This miniature of Mrs. William Robertson with those of Mrs. 


55 


William Mayrant and of Mrs. Henry Grey, which follow, are 
examples of Fraser’s long list of old ladies — charming in their 
shawls and caps. It was the day when ladies of advancing age 
did not follow the fashions of the young, but understood the 
softening effect of lace and lawn around the face and neck. 


No. XXIV b 
Mrs. Benjamin ALLSTON 
(Charlotte Ann Allston) 
1771 - 1824 
Painted before 1824. 


Mrs. Allston was the mother of Governor Robert Francis 
Withers Allston of South Carolina. 

This is one of the most delicately tinted miniatures by the art- 
ist, yet it is very positive in its treatment. The delicacy of the 
thin face and the refinement of the expression are well brought 
out. The luminous transparent background is in keeping with 
the face. 

For comparison of style it should be remembered that this 
miniature belongs to the same period as those of Mrs. Samuel 
Prioleau, 1818 and 1823. 


No. XXV a 
Mrs. Witu1Am Mayrant 
(Ann Richardson) 
Painted about 1840. 


In its general appearance this charming portrait of Mrs. May- 
rant is in the same style as that of Mrs. William Robertson, al- 
ready described, and as that of Mrs. Gray, which follows. But 
the individuality of the three thus grouped is markedly shown. 


56 





No. XXV b 
Mrs. Henry Gray 
(Yancy Cudworth) 
Painted in 1842. 
This miniature of Mrs. Henry Gray deserves all the commen- 
dation given to those of Mrs. Robertson and Mrs. Mayrant, with 
which it has been placed. 


No. XXVI a 
Wiuiam CattTett BEE 
1809 - 1881 
Undated — supposed to be about 1845. 

In the miniatures of William Cattell Bee and of the Hon. 
George S. Bryan we see a later period both in the dress and in the 
arrangement of the hair and beard than in those noticed before. 

The color-scheme of Mr. Bee’s miniature resolves itself into a 
skilful arrangement of light and dark on the medium tone of the 
background. | 


No. XXVI b 
GeorcE SMITH Bryan 
1809 - 1895 
Painted in 1845. 

A lawyer of prominence, Mr. Bryan held the position of Dis- 
trict Judge of the United States during the troublous times of 
Reconstruction. He was a member of the Conversation Club 
to which the community owes Fraser’s Reminiscences; and it 
also owes to Judge Bryan one of the two biographical sketches 
of the artist, accompanying “The Fraser Gallery”; which so 
feelingly depict for us the love and esteem in which Fraser was 
held by his contemporaries, and point out so well his abundant 
fine qualities. 


af 


No. XX VII 
ELIZABETH SARAH FABER 
(Mrs. Berkley Grimball Wilkins) — 
1825 - 1882 
Painted in 1846. 


This presentation of Miss Faber’s personality is attractive and 
interesting. The head, with its pale complexion and dark hair 
and eyes,is quietly but pleasantly painted against a color-scheme 
based on the soft grey-blue of the dress and the blues and greys 
of the sky. 


No. XXVIII a 


FREDERICK GRIMKE FRASER 
Painted about 1852. 


This miniature of Frederick Grimke Fraser, nephew of the 
artist, is the last painted by him that has come to our notice. 

The force and strength of the work is noticeable, but the paint- 
ing is coarser and not so careful as in earlier miniatures. 


No. XXVIII b 
Master JAMES BUTLER CAMPBELL 
Painted in 1845. 
This child died soon after the miniature was painted. He and 


his two little sisters painted at the same time were the children 
of Mr. James B. Campbell. 


58 


THREE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FIVE 
COPIES PRIVATELY PRINTED BY 
FREDERIC FAIRCHILD SHERMAN 
DURING NOVEMBER MCMXXIV 


























2 a pe 
eat big kn are ee 


Vee cretana tao 
AS eae ene 


eS ee 


he’ ie 
S,. viele. 





